Science fiction writing, although typically about wonders and marvels, generally has points it wishes to make and thinking it wishes to convey.  Anyone watching televised science fiction who is unaware that he or she is watching a form of morality plays in a speculative mode has been distracted by the special effects of these presentations, or else has gotten the impression that the shows are too abominable to have genuine and sincere moralities.  As to that last point, it may be that the moralities are neither genuine nor sincere, but they are thoughtful; they are points to be pondered and contemplated, tending to revert to traditional moralities and then depart again, not guaranteeing anyone of their validity.  In other words, the shows promote thinking over these humanitarian concerns.  It is taken for granted from the outset of each series that the explorations are going to be amoral, but then as a sort of counterpoint, the characters introduce moral considerations appropriate to the situations, on the principle that you can't be doing anything without thinking about what you are doing.

     The characters in STAR TREK resemble people in a play by Samuel Beckett.  They are not really in command of what they're doing and they don't really know why they're doing it.  The exploratory urge is not a rational one.  They have the mission of bringing about peace among warring factions and establishing legitimate exchange with alien races that will be progressively beneficial to both, but their first encounters are with arguments about this mission and purpose and their worthiness to be pursuing these aims.  They have no ultimate goal, just open-ended progress, and the question arises, progress toward what?  And also, away from what?  The plots frequently revert in their perspective to contemplations of feudal societies, wizardry and superstition, world wars and the like in order to answer this question.  They are moving away from war and chaos toward peace and harmony, being battle-ready on the way.  There are also aftermath shows such as BATTLESTAR GALACTICA and ANDROMEDA and BEASTMASTER which show people wallowing in degradation or trying to fight their way out of it; again, the past of mankind has not been all that good and their progress into the future is an uncertain one, with past woes sometimes coming along and triumphing over them.  It's the viewpoint that religion adopts, that man is sinful and has a heritage of warfare and that life should be a process of attempting to do better than this; does exploration and adventure accomplish any of this purpose?

     Now, that's not the only theme these shows have, vast as the scope of a study of man's integrity may be.  There is also an exploration of what constitutes reality, a theme you might expect when reality is seen to be changing due to progress. Is reality decreed, or is it a reaction to material observation, and if decreed, who is decreeing it?  There's a “stamp out reality” cast to the shows that may be expected of both fantasy and science fiction—remember, this is the “spaced out library” and that's what we're interested in here—and at least some of the characters show signs of being hip and far out. Again and again on THE NEXT GENERATION reality is questioned, in a most dynamic way—the characters encounter alternate realities, time distortions, shape changers and android imposters and body snatchers; they meet themselves and they get into dream reveries which are often indistinguishable from their more “normal” existence.  They're fantastic to begin with, so where's the limit? STARGATE, too, has frequent reality episodes wherein the characters don't know whether they're coming or going, and the real world they have to refer back to has a stargate culture in it.  Yet there is an insistence in the show that these fantasy exploits are a part of existence as well as a part of the individual consciousness.  “I think, therefore I am.”  What part of reality proceeds from the individual or the group consciousness?  How many of the viewers think, and therefore exist?  Perhaps when they don't think, they are negligible to existence—so the shows are provocative of thought.  At any rate, the shows have demonstrably attracted a number of viewers who are troubled about their own existence and whether their attitudes count.

     These shows are aware of one another; crossover remarks are made frequently enough, as when O'Neill on STARGATE claims to be Captain Kirk.  Such remarks clarify the fact that the shows are meant to be taken into consideration as shows, in other words, that their precepts and thought content are to be studied. Apparently they are accessible to one another, too, as you can see actors going from one series to another and assuming different personae, something that would be difficult if they did not maintain contact, considering how much time must be spent on series productions.  There would appear to be a sci-fi central existing in show business, as the existence of a network show devoted to science fiction already indicates. (By the way, the existence of that solely science fiction and fantasy channel is pretty obviously seen as a takeover, and as takeovers are among their themes, you'll find allusions to this in the shows themselves.)

     Of course the above comments are true of books also, and here I would point out the amount of milieu-demonstrative or –reactive material there is.  The literary milieu and the show business milieu, as well as the computer culture, are part and parcel of the themes and approaches of the material found there, as the Marshall McLuhan title suggests—“THE MEDIUM IS THE MESSAGE”.  Two (or more) books that have computer users pulled into a computer world which has its own reality are Tad Williams' OTHERLAND (a series) and Neal Stephenson's SNOW CRASH.  An individual's escape from reality may be found in David Gerrold's THE MAN WHO FOLDED HIMSELF. A book by an author who doesn't care what she writes in which the readers become characters is available—Sharyn McCrumb's BIMBOS OF THE DEATH SUN.

     So what is the significance of science fiction in the modern world?  It's the form of literature most in tune with a progressive culture and most cognizant of changes in people's ways of life. As such, it is the most apt to be communicative on these themes, to be what we would talk about in an awareness of the world around us.  With this in mind, one is satisfied to be a reviewer—the only difficulty is, what best to recommend, what individual selections should be brought to people's attention?  It doesn't make much difference—people don't take my reading recommendations anyway, if they haven't already been reading it.  So this month's column has been an interpretation of the significance of the most widely read and viewed modern science fiction.

Contents